Current Events > Police Officer denied benefits.

(+) Yeah! (+)

http://www.wsmv.com/story/35116182/police-outraged-after-officers-benefits-denied

A police officer was involved in a justified shooting. The suspect pointed a gun at him and the police officer had to respond back with deadly force.

After the event he had severe depression and nightmares. He got help from his pastor, a counselor, and eventually a psychiatrist who diagnosed him with PTSD.

Because of his PTSD he was unable to continue working as a law enforcement officer. When he tried to get "injured on duty" pension he was denied because "This employee does not meet the criteria as he was trained to expect to do this in this line of work."

He has a diagnosed mental disorder that arose from his employment as a law enforcement officer, and he is still being denied benefits.

I know there is going to be a lack of sympathy for no other reason than a bigoted view of law enforcement, but this is wrong. The "injured on duty" benefits is supposed to protect police officers that receive injuries that arise from their duties and responsibilities of their occupation, which is exactly what this is.
---

Maybe I just don't know what an injury is.

Although this does suck, square peg round hole.
---

Mental health deteriorating should be covered as a work related disability

But of course, the department will fight tooth and nail if he tries to sue for benefits, including bringing up the case in question to vilify him

ACAB
---

It happens
---

How is this legal

Now if he killed a unarmed kid he would get a raise .
---

He's also trained to expect that he could get cut, shot,ran over or maimed while apprehending or just existing in uniform. Is he to be denied benefits over that stuff as well?
---

How awful. Luckily, he's part of a union that will advocate on his behalf legally and possibly even offer him some kind of stipend in the interim. If only all american workers were so lucky.
---

Unsugarized_Foo posted...

He's also trained to expect that he could get cut, shot,ran over or maimed while apprehending or just existing in uniform. Is he to be denied benefits over that stuff as well?

That's the same thing I thought.
---

sLaCkEr408___RJ posted...

How is this legal

I don't think it is. It is likely just the department bucking up. I assume this will be settled out of court.
---

Unsugarized_Foo posted...

He's also trained to expect that he could get cut, shot,ran over or maimed while apprehending or just existing in uniform. Is he to be denied benefits over that stuff as well?

I know, right?! How is this any different? As if knowing he could be severely physically and/or mentally scarred means that he doesn't qualify for benefits. This is a terrible defense for not holding up their end of the bargain. They are praying(and preying) on the stigma of mental health shielding them from too much backlash. After the officer risked his life to protect the citizens. Disgusting.
---